Skip to main content

tv   FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX  July 27, 2014 9:00am-10:01am EDT

9:00 am
i'm chris wallace. will congress do anything about the immigration crisis? before it goes on its long summer recess? we've got a president that's awol, and the president ought to get engaged in this if he actually wants something to happen. >> what's really going on is republicans in congress are directly blocking policies that would help millions of americans. >> we'll discuss immigration and had gop agenda. the tea party favorite steve scalise in his first interview after being elected house majority w.h.i.p. plus, with thousands of children crossing the border, will the battle over immigration boost democrats or republicans in the november election. our sunday group weighs in.
9:01 am
>> then, the fighting resumes p ipgaza has hamas rejects one cease-fire and asks for another. we'll discuss the conflict with benjamin netanyahu and top palestinian leaders. and our power player of the week, designing and testing our navy's future ships. all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. prospects for a plan to deal with the flood of children coming from central america are looking less and less likely. there are still big differences between the president and republicans. and congress is scheduled to go home friday for its five-week august recess. joining us now, a key new member of the republican leadership, lose lieu congressman and tea party favorite steve scalise in his first national interview since being elected house majority w.h.i.p.
9:02 am
congratulations and welcome to "fox news sunday." >> good to be with you. >> for all the talk of the immigration crisis, there are three different plans on how to deal with it. the president wants $3.7 billion to help the children and also beef up enforcement, but no change to the 2008 law to make it easier to send children home to central america. senate democrats want $2.7 billion to do roughly the same. and house republicans want less than $1 billion focusing on enforcement and also changing that 2008 law. congressman scalise, will congress and the president make a deal before you guys go home for this five-week recess? >> chris, we're going to keep working until we get this problem solves. the bottom line is you have a crisis going on. the president refuses to acknowledge it's even exiting. he's been awol on this from the very beginning. we want to actually fix the law, and wouldn't it be good to allow the governors of the border states to call the national guard and help security the
9:03 am
bord border? this has to start with securing the border, solving the problem. the 2008 law needs to be changed. we need to make the changes. ultimately, this is the president's responsibility. he could fix the problem today. he's chosen not to, but the house is going to lead. >> you say you're going to tay and work until you solve the problem. this august recess is not set in stone, this five-week recess. you could delay it, and in fact, that's what the president called for this week. take a look. >> it's my hope that speaker boehner and house republicans will not leave town for the month of august for their vacations without doing something to help solve this problem. >> question, will house republicans postpone your vacation as the president put it, to deal with this problem, to make a deal if you don't settle it by friday? >> it's ironic, we're hear in congress right now, and the president doesn't want to work
9:04 am
with us while we're in town. he wants to wait until we're gone. he has a lot of time on his schedule to secure fund-raisers, he has no time to secure the border. he has not taken his job seriously in this regard. the house has laid out what we'll do to solve the problem. the president wants to sit back and play politics. he's flying around doing fun razors. hao doesn't have time to solve problems. >> you're not answering my question, and there are still big differences and there's every chance you will pass a bill this week, but if you don't have a deal, if the problem hasn't been solved or at least a plan to deal with it hasn't been addressed, will congress delay its recess? >> well, congress is here right now. >> will you delay your recess? >> what we pass, if the president doesn't want to do his job, whatever congress passes is going to sit in the senate or go to the white house, the president still has to take leadership. he's the president of the united states. like i said, hie has a lot of
9:05 am
time to play politics and fund raise off this. he should sit down and say do we really want to solve the problem? i want to solve the problem. i'm going to stay working. >> last time i'm going to ask, you're not willing to commit to postpone your recess if need be to deal with the senate, senate democrats, i'm not saying who's right or wrong, but you're not willing to commit to delay your recess? >> we're not on recess. we're here right now and we're ready to work. we're going to do our job this week. if the president wants to sit back and continue to point fingers, he's the president of the united states. he could solve the problem today. he's been awol. he doesn't want to solve the prrb, but we do. we're going to stay and work and get our job done. i would like the senate to do their job, the president to to their job, but we're not going to wait for that. let's see what the president is willing to do. >> meanwhile, white house officials say the president intends to take executive action by the end of the month, perhaps, to defehr deportation
9:06 am
for millions of immigrants. you're already suing the president for overreach. the question i have, if he does this, if he takes executive action, which i know you all believe is illegal, will you do nothing, will you do something such as cut off funding for thestratiothe administration, will you consider impeaching the president? >> this might be the first white house in history that's trying to start the narrative of impeaching their own president. ultimately, what we want to do is see the president follow his own laws. he took an oath to follow the law of the land. the supreme court unanimously said 12 times the president overreached and did things he doesn't have the authority to do. >> executive action to defer more deportations, what will the house do? >> we're going to put options on the table to allow the house to take legal action against the president when he overreaches hiauthority. others have done that. cases are going to the supreme court. more than a dozen times the supreme court unanimously, i'm not talking about a 5-4
9:07 am
decision, 9-0, unanimously said the president overreached. we're going to continue to be a check and balance against this administration. >> impeachment is off the table? >> the white house wants to talk about impeachment and they're trying to fund raise off that, too. >> i'm asking you, sir. >> the white house will do anything they can to change the topic away from the president's failed agenda. people paying higher costs for food, for wehealth care, for ga at the pump. the president isn't softballing the problems. we're going to try to solve problems for everyday people. i would like to see the president engaged in that, too, that's his job, but he wants to change the topic, talk about things like that. >> we talked about the fact you are the first tea party member to be part of the top house republican leadership. i think you would agree there is a split in the gop caucus between the tea party members and the so-called republican establishment. in fact, dozens of tea party members in the house may not vote even for the $1 billion that you guys are talking about to deal with the immigration
9:08 am
crisis. how do you intend on this issue and others to bridge the gap inside the gop caucus? and where do you come down on the issue of purity on the one hand, idealogical purity versus unity on the other? >> first of all, chris, what we need to do is focus on the things that unite us not only as republicans but as americans. there are lot of issues we passed out of the house that got not only a lot of republican support, tea party and every group in the conference, but also democrats. there are over 300 bills sitting in the senate that passed including many which are focused on creating jobs. look at the keystone pipeline, broad bipartisan support for that. unites republicans, and unites other people that don't consider themselves part of the republican party. and yet the senate refuses to act, the president doesn't want to act. there are a lot of things that unite us that revolve around solving the problems. that's what i'm going to do,
9:09 am
move the problems forward in a way that unites us and solves problems for hard working taxpayers. >> let's do a lightning round, quick questions and answers about some of the issues you're going to have to deal with in the house before the november midterms. the government runs out of money on october 1st. will you support a continuing resolution to keep funding and keep the government going at current levels or are you willing in an effort to cut spending to risk another government shutdown? >> we're going to keep the government running at current levels. in fact, we have passed a majority of the spending bills out of the house already. not one has been taken up by the senate. shouldn't the senate be able to agree on the bill to fund the troops? that's a bill that got over 100 democrats when it passed out of the house. >> but no government shutdown? >> no. >> i'm enacting the lightning round rules on you. you called for passing a conservative health care plan and let's put up some of the aspects of that, repealing
9:10 am
obamacare, expanding health savings accounts and letting people buy health insurance across state lines. will you push to have the house pass that and to give voters a clear republican alternative before the november midterm? >> i'm passionate about that. let's lower costs for health care. let's put patients in charge of their solutions. i absolutely want to see that get done. >> not just oppose obamacare but present a republican alternative. >> repeal and replace it with reforms. >> in the past, you have called for raising the eligibility age for medicare over the next ten years from 65 to 67 and for social security from 67 to 70. question, should that be part of the republican platform? >> we ought to have a platform to plan to save medicare from bankruptcy. under current law, medicare goes bust. i don't think that's responsible. we have laid out a plan to save it from bankruptcy not only for current seniors but for future
9:11 am
generations. i would lute to see them put some plan on the table other than letting it go bust. >> are you happy for voters to vote on that idea of raising the eligibility age? >> they have seen the proposal for the last two election cycles and democrats tried to make it a campaign issue, and they said, wait a minute, republicans have a plan to save it from going brups and it makes sense. democrats have no answer. >> thank you, thanks for talking with us today. and please come back, sir. >> great being with you. go tigers. >> okay. lsu, i get that. all right, so will washington do anything to deal with the flood of children across our border? our sunday group weighs in. plus, what would you like to ask the panel about the immigration deba debate? go to facebook or twitte twitter @foxnewssunday and we may use your question on the air.
9:12 am
he's excited for saving at staples for back to school. they're excited. ♪ these guys are super excited. because when you get notebooks for less... ♪ index cards for less... ♪ and tablets for less, all at guaranteed low prices, you can't help but show it. in a big way! staples. make more happen for less.
9:13 am
9:14 am
this is a problem of the president's own making. and then he tries to -- says he wants to solve the problem so we can stop this influx, but then he changes his mind. we've got a president that's awol. and the president ought to get engaged in this if he actually wants something to happen. >> house speaker john boehner calling out the president, especially for flipping on whether to change that 2008 law and make it easier to send children home to central america. and it's time now for our sunday group. brit hume, fox news senior
9:15 am
political analyst, usa today columnist kirsten powers, syndicated columnist george will, and juan williams. as i discussed with congressman scalise, it's looking more and more likely that congress is going to go home without making a deal to try to handle this flood of immigrants over the border. brit, if that happens, who pays the political price? >> it's hard to know. obviously, the flow of these young -- i mean, if we're talking here principally about the minors. minor children who are crossing over, that flow has begun to slow on its own. the reason being there are only so many kids in central america woo can make the harrowing journey and get here. most who can make it may already be here. as the problem subsides there might not be much blame to go around. otherwise, who knows who will
9:16 am
win the finger pointing battle. the president really did flip on changing the 2008 law. the 2008 law really is a factor here. it is what makes it possible for these kids to avail themselves of a legal process that keeps them in the country. all they technically qualify eventually for asylum here or to stay here is another matter. it gets them in and helps them stay for at least a while. you need to change the law to fix that piece. >> we asked you for questions for the panel and we got a bunch this week about congress taking that five-week recess starting on friday that we were talking with scalise. like this one, as you can see here on facebook. they don't deserve a recess, period. if someone has a crisis in their job, they just don't leave. they fix it first. worthless congress, worthless administration. kirsten, how do you respond to shaun? >> well, i agree they should deal with this. the problem is the parties are so far apart.
9:17 am
they're having completely different conversations. nancy pelosi has said these are two different issues. one is a refugee crisis . the other is an immigration issue. they think the house should pass the house version of the senate immigration bill. i think the white house has flip-flopped on this, but they seem to have moved in the same position the democrats in congress are, which is they don't want to make these changes to the 2008 law. and look, the republicans don't really seem to want to work on immigration until it comes to deporting children. this is the only thing they really have been willing to do at this point, is just to say, we'll pass the bill to deport children, but we won't talk about any sort of broader comprehensive immigration issue. >> george, i want you to respond to this. we're talking, these are not the people from mexico coming across the border. we're talking about central america, guatemala, honduras, el salvador, who are treated
9:18 am
different under the 2008 law. we're talking about 50,000 unaccompanied children who have come over the border, and tens of thousands of more of parents with children. how do you respond to kirsten and her talking about republicans who don't want to deal with immigration except deporting children, and is there a right way to deal with the problem? >> i think kirsten is largely right. my view is that we have to say to the children, welcome to america. you're going to go to school and get a jub and become americans. we have 3,141 counties in this country. that would be 20 per county. the idea that we can't assimilate these 8-year-old criminals with their teddy bears is preposterous. long term, chris -- >> you have to know, i mean, i can feel them clicking off that we're going to get tons of e-mail of people saying this guy doesn't understand the border. why should we be dealing with central america's problem? we can't import the problem. they have to deal with it there, and our border has to mean
9:19 am
something. >> we can handle the problem is what i'm saying. we have handling, the same as they call the wretched refuge of the teaming shores a long time ago and lot more people. long term, the most effective legislation passed concerning m immigration wasn't an immigration bill at all. it was bill clinton's greatest act, passage of the act that put north americans on the path to prosperity. we need to do something similar, including the fact of trying to get americans consuming so much of the drugs that are imporlted from these countries. >> getting back to john boehner's opening comment about president obama flipping, as he did on whether or not to change this law, and juan, a lot of people think the reason he did flip is because of pressure from democratic groups, particularly pro-immigration groups who feel this is above all a humanitarian crisis, is there a danger for
9:20 am
democrats here that they will be seen as soft on the issue of enforcement? >> i think there's potengspoten especially with people who are antagonistic to the cause. there was a flip, as you describe it. remember, when you talk to people of the congressional hispanic caucus who met with the president, they're at the heart of the effort, what they say is this is an effort to end due process for these children so under the '08 law, as you wall it, these young people have a right to adjudication to go before a judge to see if they qualify for refugee status. to take that away, then, is essentially undermining the law and saying, we're shuting the door on these young people. we're changeing the law at this moment because it's expeditious and our need right now, for many democrats, the view is republicans are really using this to sort of steer clear of immigrants generally, to spur turnout for the midterm election. >> the law that was passed in 2008 was an anti-trafficking
9:21 am
law. these people are not coming because of sex trafficking. they're coming because of the conditions in their country. i mean, hasn't the law been perverted in terms of the current flood of people. >> no, i think it's being used to their advantage, but not perverted. there's a real issue for these young people -- >> but it isn't sex trafficking. >> but it goes beyond it. violence was part of that law. >> that's not refugee. it has a specific meaning which is if you're a member of a religion -- >> a group of children who are living in fear of these gangs, and they're being exploited by them. >> i wish the refugee definition in our law did apply to these children. it really doesn't. they're fleeing and fleeing in fear of their lives in many cases, but it doesn't quite fit the definition. you have to clanj the definition in law in order to allow them to qualify and apply for asylum as refugees. this law, as chris points out,
9:22 am
was supposed to be about sex trafficking, but it created process where if you come from other than mexico, you're entitled, whatever the validity of your claim, to a process that keeps you in the country. and the history of this is is once you get in and get in the process, the chances are one way or another, you're going to find a way to stay here. >> it also includes social group. in this case, these young people as a social group of people who are being threatened by the gangs and whose lives are at stake -- >> doesn't work. >> -- let me say, even evan y l evangelicals this week in writing to congress said you must consider these children as children and give them due process. >> i think the evangelicals are correct, and i wish the law says something other than it says, but it doesn't. >> we have to take a break. we'll see you later in the program. when we come back, with a cease-fire, and now the resumption of fight, where do things stand in the conflict in
9:23 am
gaza between israel and hamas. we'll have a live report and we'll talk with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu and a top palestinian official. but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america. engineering and innovation jobs. advanced safety systems & technology. shipping and manufacturing. across the united states, bp supports more than a quarter million jobs. when we set up operation in one part of the country, people in other parts go to work. that's not a coincidence. it's one more part of our commitment to america.
9:24 am
9:25 am
9:26 am
fighting resumed today in gaza after hamas rejected one cease-fire but now wants another one. we'll talk with israeli prime minister netanyahu and a top palestinian official in a moment, but first we want to get the latest from fox news
9:27 am
correspondent on the hiserally border. john? >> well, chris, despite air strikes and artillery fire earlier this afternoon, it's been very quiet for the past couple hours here along the israel/gaza border. perhaps indicating that more cease-fire negotiations are going on, maybe in the works. though we have not heard of israel accepting any new cease-fire agreement. that said, chris, we continue to see the destruction in gaza city. there was nothing but rubble where homes and buildings used to stand. the areas along the israeli border and gaza have been hit the hardest by the ongoing fight, now in day 20, in the war in gaza. israel says its main objective is destroying gaza's attack tunnels. so far, 32 tunnels have been found, about half destroyed. israeli leaders say the battle will not end until that job is
9:28 am
done. cease-fire or not. so far, 46 israelis have been killed. 43 of them soldiers. while more than 1,000 people were killed in gaza and over 6,000 wounded. hamas vows to continue firing rockets and battle israeli soldiers as long as the offensive continues. islamic group wants israel and egypt's block aid of gaza lif d ed and for israeli tanks to be withdrawn, among other demands. >> so again, we've seen those images, not only in gaza city but throughout the gaza strip, as well. again, it remains very quiet here along the israel and gaza border. though we have not heard of any new cease-fire agreement. israel's security cabinet is meeting, though, in about 30 minutes so we'll see what comes outf that. chris, back to you. >> john, thanks for that. now, let's bring in israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. mr. prime minister, first, hamas
9:29 am
broke the cease-fire and the fighting resumed. now hamas wants a cease-fire. will israel accept that, and what happens next? >> well, hamas has broken five cease-fires that we accepted. and weimpmented. they rejected all of them, violated all of them, including two humanitarian cease-fires in the last 24 hours. now they come with their own cease-fire proposal, and believe it or not, they have violated even their own cease-fire proposal. they're shooting at us as we speak. so israel is not obliged and is not going to het a terrorist organization decide when it's convenient to fire at our cities, at our people, and when it's not, when they can restock. we'll take the necessary action to protect our people, including, by the way, continuing to dismantle the tunnels. that's my policy. >> so basically, the offensive, the israeli offensive in gaza is going to continue?
9:30 am
>> we'll do whatever is necessary to achieve our goal, which is to get a sustainable quiet. as far as hamas and its so-called cease-fire, they're violating their own cease-fire. it has come to the level of absurdity now. >> your defense minister has talked this weekend about a significant expansion of the israeli operation. what does that mean? and how long is it going to take? when will you know you have achieved your goals? >> well, we'll continue to act until we bring quiet and security to our people. and i think that right now, as long as hamas continues rocketing our people, attacking us, digging these tunnels under which, you know what they do? they dig. they got money from the international community to build kindergarten. they took that money and built tunnels, dug tunnels it blow up our kindergartens. we have to dismantle it and we will. we'll continue to do it until we achieve our goal of having this
9:31 am
security we can bring to our people. i hope it's as soon as possible, obviously. >> mr. prime minister, gaza officials say now that more than 1,000 palestinians, the vast majority of them civilians, have been killed. international opposition to your operation, as you well know, is growing. is that not a concern to you, and what about the protests, even riots on the west bank? are you concerned at all about a third intefadeh or an uprising there? >> well, first, i know that's what hamas is trying to do. they're trying to instigate violence in the west bank as well. we expect president abbas to do what he can and what he's responsible for, to keep the quiet on that front, because hamas just wants that to blow up as well. as far as the civilian casualties, each one is a tragedy. we don't want a single civilian tragedy. we're not targeting a single civilian. and every time you see these
9:32 am
pictures, they're heart breaking, but why is it happening? it's happening because hamas is firing 25,000 rockets on our cities. they're attacking us with terror tunnels dug into our territory. they're attacking us by land, sea, and air. obviously, we have to respond. when we respond, hamas, we're trying to minimize the civilians. the civilian casualties. we tell the civilians leave, hamas tells them to stay. why does it tell them to stay inbecause it wants to pile up the civilian casualties so any of these regrettable civilian tragedies should be placed on the responsibility of hamas. hamas is a terror organization, ruthless terrorist organization that not only wants to kill our people, it wants to sacrifice its own people. it uses them as human shields. and therefore, it should be blamed and not israel. that's the truth, and that's the simple clarity, broad clarity that should not be lost in this conflict. >> there are demands on both
9:33 am
sides, though, sir, and want to discuss a couple of those with you. hamas is demanding an end to israel's economic blockade of gaza, and in fact, you do block most imports going into the country and all exports leaving gaza to go either to the west bank or to israel. and unemployment in gaza is now over 50%. isn't -- don't they have a legitimate demand there, sir? >> first of all, we're letting in economic goods come into gaza. we're letting humanitarian gdzs as we speak, with a cease-fire, without a cease-fire, we continue to have trucks and trucks coming into gaza. the reason there's been constriction of access to gaza is precisely because they have used the incoming material, including cement or concrete, to build these tunnels, to build terror rockets to, build missiles and so on which they fire. we have to make sure such weaponry and materials do not enter into gaza.
9:34 am
i think there is a path to get out of this once we have -- i think the first thing is to accept the different proposal. that's the only game in town, what it will do is will enable us to actually get a sustainable cease' fire. that sustainable cease-fire consists of two things. one, demilleterization of gaza. we want to make sure there are no more rockets, tunnels, mi missiles and so on otherwise we'll be back here. second, social and economic relief for the people of gaza. you have to make sure the demilitarization of gaza works. if it works again to get cement, concrete to gaza to build for hamas, to build the buildings, they'll use it for tunnels. you have to have a mechanism to prevent the abuse of this cement or concrete. if you want to give them money, you want money to go to the people of gaza, but if the money
9:35 am
comes in and hamas uses it to manufacture rockets and missiles, we're going to be exactly where we are now, so you need demilitarization and economic and social relete leaf for the people of gaza. i think it's tied for the militarization. otherwise, it will simply not work. >> don't you worry, sir, and not without taking sides on who is responsible for the civilian deaths, but every time an israeli tank shell or missile hits a family and people are killed, that demilitarization becomes even harder, that there are going to be thousands of palestinians, many of whom will have lost their civilians, and again, not saying who is responsible for that, but that's going to make the possibility of any kind of peaceful situation in your part of the world even more difficult? >> look, we face a very, very difficult situation with a ruthless enemy. it's the same thing you see with al qaeda, with isis, with boca
9:36 am
haram. they just don't care. we cannot pretend that we can allow them to continue to attack us, continue to fire rockets at us, continue to dig tunnels against us, and say, okay, because we don't want to take action against them, they can continue this. what choice do we have? obviously, we try to minimize as best we can civilian casualties. they're all incidental casualties. none are a direct target, but we have no chose but to defend ourselves. you're right, this creates a terrible tragedy when you have an enemy that deliberately wants to pile up its own people. the deaths of its own people as a human shield and as a battering ram in international diplomacy, the only thing i can say is appeal to the people who are watching this to say don't let them get away with it. put the blame where blame belongs, on hamas. >> thank you for talking with us today. always good to speak with you. >> thank you. thank you, chris. >> now, let's hear from the
9:37 am
other side of the conflict. joining us from ramallah on the west bank, a palestinian leader and member of the pol executive committee. hamas rejected an israeli cease-fire, then they requested one. you just heard the prime minister say they're now violating their own cease-fire. what's going on with hamas? >> well, actually, the question is not just hamas itself. there are several resistance groups in gaza, but mr mr. netanyahu, who loves to lump everybody under hamas, accuse hamas of everything, including killing its own people and so on, no, this is a situation where israel is holding the population captive under a cruel siege by air, by sea, by land, and bombing them and shelling them by air, by sea, and by land, and then blaming the victims for their own deaths. this is unacceptable. the cease-fire is something we wanted, and we have a government
9:38 am
of national accord. and we've asked for cease-fires, but we need a cease-fire that will bring about also an end to the conditions that are creating and generating all this violence. lifting the siege on gaza, allowing the gazan people to fish in their own sea, to plant their own lands instead of having them declared battle zones by izisrael. to be free to meet their families, to live, to study. israel is not allowing them to do any of these things. there's no use just dealing with the latest attack. we need to put in place connecti condition s that would prevent its occurrence. we agree with john kerry. the proposal, we accepted all the palestinians accepted this, but it was israel that refused. i don't know why it slipped netanyahu's mind. >> you talk about israel holding the people in gaza captive.
9:39 am
the death toll in gaza now is over 1,000 people. but isn't a lot of the responsibility on hamas and the various other resistance groups in gaza who continue to fire thousands of rockets into israel? if you were to stop the rocket attacks which attack israeli civilians and force them to run for bomb shelters, if you stop those, wouldn't the fighting end? >> if it stops the occupation and its enslavement of the whole nation, its captivity of the people of gaza, the west bank, jerusalem, treating us like some subhuman species, then the violence will stop. it's generating by an abnormal condition called israeli military occupation. they devalue our lives and rights. they persist in bombing and shelling people and civilians and then they blame the victims.
9:40 am
i tell you something, frankly. if israel does not attack the palestinians, if israel does not continue with this ruthless bombing of whole families. look, about 50 families were totally annihilated, whole neighborhoods, whole areas were demolished. they have f-16s, they have gun boats, they have apache gun ships. they have been shelling by tanks and so on. and the palestinian people are being asked to leave their homes. some of them, not all, because israel thinks it has the right to demolish their homes. whole neighborhoods, you're in washington, imagine if montgomery county or fairfax, they're told to leave your homes because we want to shell them. they have done nothing wrong. they want to live. >> i don't mean to interrupt. i do have to ask you one more question. and that is, you talk about hamas and the people in gaza as if they were innocents. the fact is that hamas puts its
9:41 am
rockets, digs its tunnels in civilian areas, using the civilians as human shields, and you talk about the economic blockade of gaza, but the fact is when hamas does get the cement and the steel for construction, instead of using it to build schools, they use it to build this elaborate series of tunnels to attack israel. >> well, i'm not a spokesperson for hamas, but whatever they build, whether tunnels or otherwise, they have a right to self-defense. palestinians have a right to self-defense. you cannot place them under occupation, shell sthem and bomb them, and destroy them and then tell them, if they act that they are terrorists. it's very easy for netanyahu to pull out the terrorist card. it's much more difficult for people to look at the truth and understand that israel is engaging in state terrorism. they're doing it long distance. all the people who are killed,
9:42 am
all the civilians have been palestinians. 1,060 palestinians have been killed by israeli fire. you have more than 6,000 palestinians injured, over 150,000 who have lost their homes. as i said, you have gift families who have been totally obliterated. are you telling me that hamas or any of the palestinian resi resistance groups are responsible? it's israeli occupation. it's israeli siege, and it's israel's use of unbridled power and making the military machine that has led to this human tragedy. and what adds insult to injury is this persistent dehumanization. netanyahu may be very glib, but no amount of manipulation will hide the truth. people are beginning to question the very essence, the very nature of this occupation, and its cruelty and ruthlessness. >> we want to thank you so much for joining us today and
9:43 am
providing the palestinian viewpoint on this continuing conflict. >> thank you. >> thanks so much. up next, from gaza to ukraine, and now the evacuation of our embassy in tripoli. president obama's foreign policy continues to hit road blocks. we'll bring back our panel to discuss it. and what do you think about president obama's recent struggles across the globe? join the conversation on facebook with other fns viewers. [ male announcer ] meet mary. she loves to shop online with her debit card. and so does bill, an identity thief
9:44 am
who stole mary's identity, took over her bank accounts and stole her hard earned money. unfortunately, millions of americans just like you learn all it may take is a little misplaced information to wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft, and no one helps stop it better than lifelock. if mary had lifelock's bank account alerts, she could have been notified in time to help stop it. lifelock has the most comprehensive identity theft protection available, guarding your social security number, your money, your credit, even the equity in your home. you even get a $1 million service guarantee. that's security no one can beat. don't wait until you become the next victim! call the number on your screen and use promo code notme for 60 days of lifelock identity theft protection and get a document shredder free. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com/notme. now you can connect with fox
9:45 am
news sunday on facebook and twitter. check out exclusive material online at facebook and share it with other fox fans. and tweet us at fox news sunday using hash tag #fns. be part of the discussion and weigh in on the action every fox news sunday.
9:46 am
we are suspending our current diplomatic activities at the embassy, not closing the embassy, but suspending the activities. >> secretary of state kerry announcing another setback for u.s. foreign policy, this time in libya, and we're back with the panel. the decision to move all u.s. diplomatic personnel out of the u.s. embassy in tripoli to evacuate them to tunisia comes amid growing fighting.
9:47 am
heavy fighting among various militias in libya. fair to say that our intervention in that country back in 2011 to topple gadhafi has not worked out quite the way president obama thought it would? >> it toppled gadhafi or helped, but you always have to deal with the aftermath. it's possible to win the war and lose the peace. there hasn't been much peace in that troubled country and doesn't look like there will be much anytime soon, and it's hard to argue the administration policy, when you factor in what happened in benghazi, has been a success there. which is not to say the united states by itself could have controlled the outcomes there. maybe it couldn't, but you start looking around for, you know, where was the effort to make this work? what did they do? you know, what did hillary clinton do to try to make it work better in the country? it's pretty hard to point to anything. it's one moe place in the world among many where u.s. efforts such as they have been have not worked out. >> speaking about other troubled
9:48 am
spots, ten days after the downing of that malaysian airliner in ukraine, russian president putin has not scaled back. in continfact, he continues to tanks, surface to air missiles into ukraine, and there's new indication this week, videos and allegations from top white house officials that russia is firing directly on ukrainian military positions from inside russia. kirsten, clearly, putin doesn't feel that there's a heavy price to pay for ignoring the u.s. and western europe. >> well, there isn't. i think that's fair to say. and you know, there are reports that the white house or the pentagon is looking at ways to provide intelligence support to separatists and the white house still has not really debated the plan, so we don't know what's going to happen there, but i have to say, as much as i think it's a fair criticism to say obama has not handled this as well as he could have, there's a heavy onus on europe.
9:49 am
but at the same time, the president plays a important role to play there to get europe more involved, to get europe to see that they're going to have to probably make some sacrifices of their own, perhaps economically, to deal with this issue. and until they're engaged, i think it does limit somewhat what the u.s. can do. >> while all this was happening, president obama continued his fund-raising tour on the west coast, and even a loyal democrat like california senator dianne feinstein called obama out for keeping to his schedule. take a look. >> i'm not going to tell the president what to do. but i think the world would very much respect his increased attention on this matter. and i think there ought to be increased attention. >> george, i'm not going to ask you what the president is thinking, but i'm doing to ask, what is your best guess as he continues on this schedule, what he and his advisers are possibly
9:50 am
thinking? >> well, because his policy is, i unruffled placidity in the face of chaos, he can be placid on the road or at home, it makes no difference. were he conducting a more aggressive policy, he could do that from the live room of a rich donor'sbeverly hill s. it's the policy, not the optics that are the problem. with libya, we have created a failed state in libya. we entered, remember, it was our responsibility to protect benghazi. instead, we went in and embarked on an eight-month, this wasn't mission creep, mission gallop, an eight-month mission to assassinate gadhafi. what do we produce? a complete vacuum. this is probably the worst fa fallier, i believe, libya, of the entire regime, because it was so totally optional and silly from the beginning. >> juan, whether it's libya,
9:51 am
whether it's what's going on in gaza and the inability of secretary of state kerry despite his shot of diplomacy to engineer a cease-fire, whether it's putin escalating, not de-escalating, how serious is it for the president and one could argue the country when it's a growing perception the country isn't leading the way it used to. >> it has a lot to do with the optics and the partisanship in terms of the critsome. >> what about the situation on the ground? >> he's engaged. it's about the policy. do you agree or disagree with the policy? let's take libya, for example. i think the united states after what we have gone through in iraq, afghanistan, is out of the nation-building business. there's no political support for that kind of activity. you can say going after gadhafi was wrong, but people aren't going to make that case. the question is what comes after and should the united states be investing time and energy in
9:52 am
rebuilding libya. >> if you could rewind history to 2011, would you be in favor of decapitating the leadership? wouldn't you rather if gadhafi was in power? >> for the man who was fomenting so much of the terrorism in the middle east, you would have to say no, george. >> you want a failed state? >> much like the arab spring, when you look at what's going on in syria, when you look at egypt which is back to the autocratic strong man in charge, that's what not we in democracy want, that's true. i wouldn't argue with you, but we're in the business of standing up for our national interests and getting rid of gadhafi falls in that. >> we had no national interest. it was pure in the sense of untainted -- >> it was an attempt to side with what we thought was the forces of merging forces of history in the arab spring. it obviously hasn't worked out, but i can't help but point out
9:53 am
the irony of the people who criticize the president for not working long enough when they have done a terrible job. why would they want him to work all the harder at doing things they deeply disapprove of in the first place? it seems to me a lot of his critics may be well advised to pipe down and not encourage him to work harder. >> more fund-raisers, more political press? >> whatever. >> thank you panel. up next, our power player of the week. we take you to where the u.s. navy fleet begins. >up next, our the week. we take you to where the u.s. navy fleet begins. >up next, our the week. we take you to where the u.s. navy fleet begins. >up next, our the week. we take you to where the u.s. navy fleet begins. up next, ourf the week. we take you to where the u.s. navy fleet begins.
9:54 am
9:55 am
i've lived in washington more than 30 years, but until last fall, i never knew what went on behind the walls of a navy base just outside the city. here's our power player of the week. >> we start with modeling and simulation and do model testing, and then that actually translates into a ship design. so we actually, the flaet begins right here. >> dr. tim arcano is talking about the naval service warfare center outside washington. a remarkable installation where scientists design, build, and test ship prototypes. how important is this facility in designing the navy of the 21st century? >> you don't want to just go out and builds a new ship. you want to be able to develop it a smart way, so you reduce the risk, reduce the cost by using models. >> it starts on computer. they test the shape of the hull,
9:56 am
materials to be used, how they can make it harder for an enemy to detect, and more fuel efficient. then they make a scale model, usual usually 1/20 the size of the actual ship and take it to the basin. the basin is 3200 feet long. they can create two-foot waves and tow a model up to 60 miles per hour. >> we can make sure that the ships ultimately get designed and built are safe and survivable in effective war fighting platforms for the united states navy. >> that demands precision. they can record 400 types of data on how the model is going through the water. and the rails that run the 3,000 feet along the sides of the basin are shaped to curve with the earth's surface. >> they're actually designed within 2/1,000 of an inch or one tenth the average thickness of a fingernail. >> but they're not done, next
9:57 am
they go to the maneuvering and sea keeping facility, 240 feet wide, 360 feet long. it's five acres under one roof. >> we're able to run radio-controlled free running mottles up to 30 feet in length in open ocean conditions. >> all that testing works. arcano showed us a scale model of the destroyer to which they added a small flap in the stern to redistribute the flow around the hull. >> it's actually increasing the efficiency tremendously of our ship moving through the water, so from that, we're able to achieve great fuel savings and it increasing the range and the speed of the destroyer. >> this flap here? >> yes, sir. >> navy ships are typically operational for more than 30 years. so it's essential to work out all the problems before they're built. as they say, this is where the fleet begins. >> the walls of this facility are adorned with the history of
9:58 am
the past in terms of all the models that have been tested here. developing advanced cutting edge technologies that are going to benefit the sailor and marine. we're on the tip of the sphere of our nation's defense. what more could you ask for? >> the naval center recently updated its wave maker system, allowing them to simulate conditions for ships anywhere in the world. from a sunny day off tahiti to a hurricane barreling up the east coast. and that's it for today. have a great week. and we'll see you next "fox news sunday."
9:59 am
10:00 am
discover the champion in you! . (applause) well, god bless you. it's a joy to come into your homes and if you're ever in our area please stop by and be a part of one of the services. i promise you we'll make you feel right at home. thanks so much for tuning in. thank you again for coming out today. i like to start with something funny. i heard about this minister. he was finishing up a fiery sermon on self-control. he said with great passion, "if i had all the beer in the world i would throw it into the river." with a greater fervor he said, "if i had all the wine in the world i would throw it into the river." almost at the top of his lungs, "if i had all the whiskey in the world i would throw it into the river." he sat down. song

44 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on